Ignoring the argument of whether it was wise or not to trade for him — that’s too political and heated for me to touch! — the fact is we now have Sgt Bergdahl and we’re going to have to do something with him.

In the military community, the talk has been almost non-stop on what should happen. Frankly, most of it has been over-blown and too passionate, in my opinion.

But an officer I served with made some of the most insanely good commentary I’ve seen yet.

In asking him about Bergdahl, I said, “The evidence against Bergdahl seems pretty stacked, but he deserves the chance to explain what happened. (And I’m glad I don’t have to make the call — five years in captivity would make what should be a pretty simple decision much more difficult.)”

My friend and officer, who I’m choosing not to name, replied with this amazing analysis:

“Seems like a strange cat to begin with. His pops’ whole growing a beard thing suggests the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. But if he deserted, he needs to be held accountable, at least nominally (even if only NJP). Tougher call about all of the VA benefits he would rate as a POW. If he aided and abetted though, he needs to get hammered. That will be a tough case to prove though from an evidentiary standpoint because everyone breaks sooner or later. Tough to draw that line.”

What do the members of Mitchell’s Militia think? Do you agree?

And what do you all think should happen? (If commenting, please keep your comments as tactful and respectful as possible!)

If you enjoy fast-paced books, you just might like my works. “Sold Out” tracks the life of a legendary Marine Sniper after a CIA unit decides to kill him for reasons of national security. “Little Man, and the Dixon County War” tells the uphill fight a young deputy faces after finding himself in the sights of a mighty cattle baron. And “Soldier On,” a short novel, follows the lives of several German soldiers in a depleted infantry company trying to make it through the final, miserable months of World War II.

48 responses to “Some amazing analysis on what should happen to Sgt Bergdahl”

Sorry Stan. I disagree with your former officer and friend.
“NJP?” Really. If sufficient evidence exists that the guy willingly walked away from his post during a time of war, he should face court-martial, at the least serve a lengthy prison sentence, be dishonorably discharged and forgotten on the trash heap of human history. Article 85 of the UCMJ still states ” Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct…”
We will never know whether or not he aided the enemy. Even if evidence existed, I honestly don’t think this administration has the stomach to go after a guy they have claimed “served with honor and distinction.”

The wisdom to trade for this soldier for 5 bad guys certainly is political and just one more example of the administrations corporate judgement that makes one think, “WFT?”

I think the NJP point is more about the idea that more than likely, at some point this turned into a raw deal for the guy. Five years is a long time to be away from home, getting treated who knows how.

And the NJP would be on his record and follow him the rest of his life.

There’s no way I’m going to defend this guy, but one thing I always note with irony is how we expect military members to be perfect, but if an athlete of the same age in college does something beyond stupid, we always find a way to look over that or kind of ignore it. Hell, Coaches often go so far as telling reporters and the public not to criticize them because they’re not professional athletes yet. (Obviously, in your case, you served your time in the military, so I respect what you’re saying. And your reaction was my initial reaction. We’ll just have to see what this guy’s side of the story is.)

One other small factor in my mind was he was no longer on duty. Had he abandoned his post while on duty and further endangered the men around him, that would have made it far worse, in my opinion.

I haven’t seen any historical references to previous Americans, but surely something similar happened during Vietnam? Especially with how many served and were drafted? Wouldn’t you say maybe some of them saw things they disagreed with and walked to the other side? Or even left on R&R and never come back? Do you happen to know?

In Vietnam, Marine Pvt. Robert Garwood would be the most similar case here, Stan.

As for the trade with the 5 Taliban leaders (remember they were captured late 2001 to mid 2002), theres an election right now, with Abdullah Abdullah set to replace Karzai (who we’ve become become tired with).

Remember the Taliban became hugely popular because the warlords of the 90s & late-80s, who we supported during the Russian-Af wars, were acting a fool, so it took the Taliban to regulate them.

It could be that those 5 were the least likely to oppose us, remember also that the negotiations for the Bergdahl swap was initially 20 or so prisoners and millions of dollars.

Whatever the machinations behind the Bergdahl swap, vilifying him before he’s had the chance to share his side is just un-American. FYI, the Pvt. Garwood case, the diff with Bergdahl would be his several attempts at escape form his captors.

Also the Philippine-American war in 1899 to 1905 (there about) would have more of these desertion for defection type of incidents, instead of the ‘walking home from hostile territory to start anew’ stories.

Stan,
I don’t think we will ever know the real story behind Garwood. He was left behind after the big return in 1973 and was a huge embarrassment to our government when he came back all those years later talking about other POW’s who were still being held.
The court martial found him not guilty of the most serious charges, but got him on enough for a DD and forfeiture of all pay, allowances, and benefits.
We know that we walked away from WWII POW’s held by the Soviets and guys taken in Korea (held by the North Koreans, CHICOM’s and probably Soviets too).
We really haven’t kept the faith that we always claim when it comes to our missing.
Not sure why Garwood is being compared to Bergdahl. I have never heard of anyone from Garwood’s outfit saying that he was a malcontent or that he was talking smack about America – but we are hearing that from a lot of people Bergdahl served with.
I was down in the Chu Lai AO when Garwood was taken and it was a pretty big deal. We already had some aviators shot down, but this was a guy taken/missing from a very secure AO. We had just gone into Vietnam that year and Da Nang was HQ for the MEF/MAF. I went up there for a 3 day R&R and it was the safest I’d felt in months.
I’m posting all of this from memory, so am probably shaky on some of the details – but I wouldn’t know where to find the truth. Sadly.
S/F
OG

Garwood is the most similar re Vietnam in comparison. Where a handful of Bergdahl’s platoon buddies are talking smack about him, it was a handful of POW buddies that talked smack about Garwood–diff here is that aiding the enemy is an actual offense, BUT

being disillusioned by the war, of being a soldier and of America in Bergdahl’s case, isn’t (that’s protected by the 1st Amendment).

UA is the only thing you can ding Bergdahl for at this point, unless he cops out to deserting, very unlikely. Intent here is the hardest to prove.

5yrs in captivity, time served, sep him out, and you have the makings of an HBO movie and/or a book.

Stan –
I think I figured out how to actually “Reply” to your comment this time. One of my previous posts went in the wrong ‘response’.
I’m seeing a lot of the Administration’s supporters fan out all over the net spreading this ‘not a deserter’ concept.
Based on actions – the actual text in the emails, and the fact that he stacked his stuff in a neat little pile and abandoned it, the desertion charge would be a slam-dunk – but doubt that this will get to the court-martial stage.
I remember a lot of scuttlebutt about going over to the other side and/or going UA from R&R, but don’t know that it ever was validated. The most vivid memory is of a “Salt & Pepper” duo who were frequently seen on the Ho Chi Minh trail.
The worst charge Garwood was convicted of was “collaboration” – based on his working on vehicles and – I think – a power generator. POW’s have always been allowed to perform “work” while captured. We brought back thousands of German and Italian POW’s and they worked in camps and farms all over the U.S.
Our WWII POW’s performed work while captured – to include doctors/Medics/Corpsman.
My opinion – Garwood got nailed because he was living proof that our government lied about “all” POW’s being accounted for after the 1973 release.
I’ll stop here before I get into full on rantin’ and ravin’ mode.
OG

Emails to his parents: Yesterday the 6 of Bergdahl’s platoon buddies on FOX’s Megyn Kelly expressed surprised with the contents of his email, since they remembered Bergdahl expressing disillusionment with inaction rather than action. So Bergdahl’s sentiments as his platoon buddies recalled differ from what was said in his email.

His gear: I’ve read he mailed all his gear back, and have read he arranged his gear when he left. Unless there is a note to prove that he intended to leave, never to come back, there’s no way of discerning intent.

It’s not a slam dunk.

The primary difference between the two offenses is “intent to remain away permanently.” If one intends to return to “military control,” one is guilty of UA not desertion, even if they were away for ten years.

The burden of proof that the accused intended to someday return to “military control” lies with the defense.

A person who is absent for just a day or two, then apprehended, could still be charged with the offense of desertion, but the prosecution would have to show evidence that the accused intended to remain away permanently.

I’m no JAG officer, but I do know that desertion is pretty tricky to prove. There’s no “slam-dunk” here, especially with this case.

Just to clarify, your friend said that if Bergdahl deserted he should be held accountable…at least NJP. He wasn’t suggesting that for aiding and abetting the enemy.
The fact is, if the guy deserted, its hard for me to get a lump in my throat about how the enemy treated him after they took him hostage. No doubt the kid has had a crappy 5 years, but it may have been his choice.

I served in the Navy. I have an “NJP” logged in some dusty old book somewhere, but it has hardly “followed” me. It would only be an issue for Bergdahl if he decided to make the Army a career. I don’t think that was ever an option.

This Sargent wasn’t some frat boy at the local university who cut a few classes and got himself jammed up with the local sheriff. This young man took the same oath that you and I took. He learned about the UCMJ in boot camp like you and I. I would certainly hope that we would always hold the members of our military to a higher standard than the members of any college football team. That’s not to say that I expect members of the military to be perfect. However, I generally expect anyone to who takes an oath to be true to their word.

I’m confused about his status at the time he was captured or left his post. Are you saying that he was not on active duty at the time he found himself in the hands of the Taliban? Had his enlistment ended?

I don’t have first hand knowledge of anyone walking away from their post in previous wars, but yes I’m sure that its happened. I never served in combat, so I can’t imagine the horror and stress that combat soldiers must endure. Not serving in combat doesn’t prevent me from having strong opinions about this issue. On the contrary, I thank God for each and every American military member that has served in combat so I haven’t had too. That is exactly why I feel so strongly about this story. Millions of American combat veterans didn’t desert after experiencing the horrors of war. Those that do must be severely punished if for no other reason.

There won’t be one buddy. You have more talent in your little finger than I could ever muster.

Please don’t misunderstand. I don’t know if the guy is guilty of anything. I read and watch TV like every other overly opinionated schmuck. My opinions are based on what if.

Article 85 gives the military court latitude in sentencing. I agree with the spirit of your suggestion. If he walked away while on watch…yep…firing squad. Waking up at 2:00am and going AWOL while not on watch…heavy prison sentence. IMHO.

Love this phrase: “…like every other overly opinionated schmuck.”.
That does too often properly describe posters on social media – other than official Mitchell’s Militia Members, of course.
Several stories coming out now about Soldiers at that outpost being required to sign NDA’s – actually being pulled off mission to come in and sign them – “or else”.
This whole thing is turning uglier by the day and – no – it has nothing to do with lefties or righties or any other “ies”. It is about a totally politicized military and gonad-less 3 & 4 star generals who care more about their post-military career than their troops.
Sad days for the troops still out there with their boots in the dirt.
Semper Fi, Marines.
OG

It’s interesting how quickly the right has already tried, convicted, and condemned SGT Bergdahl without knowing the full story. But we know why that is — because this happened on President Obama’s watch. So we get the full vitriol of “we never negotiate with terrorists” (except when we do, as we have done throughout our history).

You know, as well as I, that if it were President Romney in the White House, Republicans would be pi**ing all over themselves in their excitement of congratulating President Romney on “leaving no man behind.”

But I guess “leave no man behind” applies only when it’s someone who espouses the same point of view as you do. (And by “you,” I’m referring to the conservative neocon chickenhawks who are devouring this country.) It’s the same as when participants at a Republican town hall meeting actually booed a servicemen currently serving in Iraq because he said he was gay.

And does the right think that these “worst of the worse” will really live scot-free for the rest of their natural lives? This is the president, who, when they aren’t accusing him of being weak, is the one they call dictatorial for ordering drone strikes all the time.

The cognitive dissonance that informs conservatives is truly scary to behold. If there’s a reason America is on the downward slope of civilization, it’s because of the fear and hate-mongering these people espouse.

Thanks so much for the comment! Besides reading and taking in your comment, I also read the entire story on the link, as well, even though it was pretty long (to be frank).

Not sure if you know this, but I’m a moderate, so I try to read a few things that are far Right and far Left most every day. It was good for me to see CWO Wright’s entry, as it’s one of the better balances that I’ve seen to most of the stuff I’ve read from the Right. (Although clearly he was fired up and passionate about the topic. <— understatement of the century.)

But the Right is fired up, too, and I understand why the Left has about had enough. I'm not going to get into who's right or who's wrong, but I like to try to stay as educated to everyone's perspective as I can, so I really appreciate you dropping a comment. (I'm pretty sure this is your first comment on the site, so welcome! Please join in again in the future!)

One thing I probably need to do for myself is educate myself on just who the five are. If they are Taliban, as I've read, then I'm not sure we could have held them a lot longer once the war ends next year. (I think the world pressure to release them would be too much.) But if they have some al Qaeda ties, then it changes things.

Yeah, not happening here if I can prevent it. I monitor all my threads — even to old posts.

If it gets out-of-control, I’ll just close the comments and delete all the posts. Mostly, as you know, we know the regulars, and even when we disagree, we do so with respect.

Way I see it, a good site should be like a bar. Great place to talk and gripe and bond, but if any troublemakers show up, you need to boot them out. I’ll stay vigilant, especially on a sensitive thread like this.

I’m just beyond happy to have so many friends to talk all this stuff over with. (Most forums and news sites spin out of control within about four or five comments…)

Is “oldgyrene” suggesting I’m a paid poster trolling forums? I’m not. I suppose it’s a compliment to Stan — that his blog attracts enough attention to warrant a “paid troll.” I’m sorry you think that someone who posts an opinion contrary to your own must have been paid to do so.

I discovered Stan’s blog from a post he made on the “Terminal Lance” Facebook page regarding a Marine who committed suicide. I liked what I read here. From there, I picked up one of his books, so I check in periodically, and if there’s something I want to comment on, I do. Even when it is contrary to everyone else’s opinion.

(I just re-read the damn thing and it still punches me right in the gut… And to know that his story is but one of dozens — or probably hundreds…)

But, I’m getting off track. At any rate, we’re glad to have you on board, and I appreciate you buying a book and sticking around. (I think having done these things makes you an official member of Mitchell’s Militia, though I can’t vouch for whether that’s a good or bad thing!)

Please continue to weigh in, especially when you disagree! I love healthy dialogue, and I’m probably more moderate than most of the folks that comment, so I could use some reinforcements! : )

Finally, if you ever see something worth posting about, shoot me an email. (Heck, if you even have an idea you’d like to guest post about, I’d consider that, as well. You’ve seen what I generally post about. Just steer clear of the politics since I believe there’s far more that unites us than divides us.)

I guess excellence is in the eye of the beholder. CWO Wright’s rant looked more like a creative writing exercise audition for a publisher than a coherent thoughtful essay.

I agree that there is politics in play here. That’s at least a two headed beast. I don’t agree that to most people this is just another hate Obama first reaction. I think reasonable people have serious questions about negotiating with terrorists and trading away five apparently pretty dangerous guys.

My problem is not that Bergdahl was freed by the Taliban. I’m glad for his family.
My concern is how it was done and at what cost. Save all of the wingnut bashing and assumptions about how other people might react in a hypothetical situation. This is a serious situation and like it or not, this administration may have broken the law.

Thanks for not over-reacting to Thaddeus’s comments, David. And I have no doubt that the law was broken on this, but then I have this belief that pretty much every President breaks the law. (Certainly, my favorite one — Abraham Lincoln — did!)

Ultimately, I think being President is about doing what you think is right, keeping the trust of the people, and (frankly) keeping your political support as high and strong as possible.

We’ll have to see where Obama stands on those things as the weeks and months go by. (I’m confident you agree that had the Right not used its powder on some earlier “-gates,” more of the public would fall in behind them. But since they have, the Administration will probably play the “they’re always pissed about something” card.)

I certainly don’t wish to get into politics with this situation, but personally I have no sympathy for someone deserting during time of war. Evidently, he thought the other side was better at the time. Now I’m hearing news about two 1st Sergeants involved in a prostitution ring with female privates at Fort Hood. I don’t know the full story yet, but I’m worried about our military when these things happen. Remember the Drill Sergeants (Air Force & Army) demanding sex from recruits? Has anything really changed? What kind of military do we want, warriors or pimps? It sickens me.

We shouldn’t have traded for him. I can’t imagine he’ll be court martialed after we gave up five top Taliban to get his sorry behind back. They’ll say he’s “recovering” and eventually the question will fade. I have no idea what Prez was thinking.

I heard Greta at Fox say she thought there’s got to be something else we don’t know about. I’d been thinking the same thing when I heard her say that. But so far I don’t know what that something else is or might be. It’s incredible not only that they did this, but also that they apparently didn’t see the blowback coming.
I usually like Rachel Maddow, but she was totally off base last night comparing Bergdahl to Jessica Lynch. No comparison, and a disgusting insult to Lynch. But maybe Maddow offers insight into bizarre WH thinking.
Hope all is well with you and Danah.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if there isn’t something inside these guys. (Have you seen those tracking devices they put on boxes? Hell, you could put it in their food. Wouldn’t matter once the Hellfire missile hit.)

Not to mention, the NSA could have a field day for the next year as these guys try to (or do) communicate back home.

So, we monitor them for a year, hit them with drones when they return, and roll up their network after we’ve snuffed them? <— This is about the only thign that makes sense to me…

Which is ridiculous because we have plenty of terrorists successfully imprisoned here, and none has escaped. We’ve also shown we can try terrorists here, even in downtown NYC. I live close to San Quentin, I wouldn’t worry if they moved some terrorists here.

I’m hearing reports that this guy had walked off twice before, once stateside and once after that in theatre only to return hours later. He should have received disciplinary action then if that’s true. He should receive a court marshal now. He’ll have his chance to give his side of the story but he risked the lives of his brothers in arms during a time of war and he needs to answer for it. I’m not even going to get into the politics.

That was an awesome article! Thanks. I re-tweeted it. I think there’s a very distinct difference in how Marines view the Bergdahl case (the swap notwithstanding) than other vets. That I think is worth writing about.

Hey, Stan! Thanks for this post. The most balanced and fair thus far in all of the internet.

I knew 2 Marines (one in A school & one in the fleet) who made a habit of going UA for 2 to 3 weeks at a time. Not so sure about the fleet case, but I believe it was NJP’ed.

As for the A school habitual UA devil, I remembered him well since I got to work with him on many of his working party details. Smart guy, athletic, otherwise a squared away Marine had it not been for his habit of going UA.

Eventually he was let go, failure to adjust. The 2 instances I remember being amicable, the 2 were shamed, but they were dealt it fairly, paper work, then eventually let go.

With Bergdahl, he seems to be unjustifiably vilified, if he was a shitbag, this would’ve been apparent in bootcamp, with his unit in Alaska, then working up at Ft. Irwin, but supposedly he was a squared away soldier, who not only PT’ed, shot well, but also read expensively about the AO he was getting himself shipped to.

My reading of him is that of a idealistic soldier, a bit of an action junky, who didn’t quite fit in with his platoon.

I’d like to see more articles addressing the failure of small unit leadership here. I honestly think that had Bergdahl been with the Marines, he’d have faired better.

Not sure that any of us can properly use the phrase “unjustifiably vilified”. Those who served with him in-country have made the harshest comments I’ve read. I haven’t yet seen any of them offer any kind of justification for what he did. The rest of us are only reading from a distance (time and miles) and forming opinions based on third-fourth-…party statements.

Not only is this desertion in the face of the enemy, they can probably tack on an Article 87.

Thanks for all the comments! I think I’ve made most of the points I want to make for now (until more news breaks). (I’ll look up the links and data points you shared so that I’m better educated historically speaking.)

BTW, if you keep commenting at your current rate, I’m officially drafting you in as a member of Mitchell’s Militia!

As for “unjustifiably vilifying”, I guess I’m speaking more on the media coverage, FOX/conservative blogosphere. Duane Clarridge’s Eclipse sitreps of Bergdahl’s captivity so far is the most we have. Everything else so far is righteous indignation.

The question is how do you prove desertion if the deserter gets nabbed before he can carry out his plan?

The administration is already on record as considering his service to be honorable, so it will have a hard time handing him over to the Army for any investigation of possible desertion, let alone a trial. As we know, this administration never admits it was wrong, so there will be intense political pressure coming from the White House to grease the skids for this guy. I predict he will never serve a day and quite probably will get an honorable discharge. The facts certainly won’t support that kind of outcome but since when did facts ever matter?